Review

This book frequently appears on product management reading lists—which makes sense given how much negotiation the product role requires. While it's a masterclass in negotiation tactics, I'd recommend product managers focus on co-creating strategy with stakeholders. This approach transforms future negotiations into collaborative discussions about how best to achieve strategic goals.

You Might Also Like:

Book Review and Summary: Talking to Humans by Giff Constable

Get a comprehensive review and summary of the best-selling book "Talking to Humans" by Giff Constable, the market research and product development expert. Learn about the key principles and practices for conducting effective customer research and using the insights to inform product development.

andrewclark.co.uk

How to Lead in Product Management

Roman is one of my favourite product management authors. His concise, to-the-point writing style is incredibly respectful of your time. He delivers wall-to-wall concepts without any storytelling fluff, providing just enough prose to get the point across.

andrewclark.co.uk

Book Review and Summary: The Making of a Manager by Julie Zhuo

Get a comprehensive review and summary of the best-selling book "The Making of a Manager" by Julie Zhuo, the product design and management expert. Learn about the key principles and practices for becoming an effective manager and leader, based on Zhuo's own experience and insights from top executives.

andrewclark.co.uk

Key Takeaways

The 20% that gave me 80% of the value.

FBI hostage negotiators consistently outperform Harvard Law professors in mock negotiations, demonstrating that emotional intelligence and tactical empathy are more effective than pure logic. This insight forms the foundation of modern negotiation strategy, where understanding and managing emotions proves more valuable than relying on theoretical frameworks or aggressive tactics.

The concept of tactical empathy involves active listening and carefully calibrated questioning rather than following scripts or formulas. By labelling emotions with phrases like "It seems like..." negotiators can defuse tension and build trust. The goal is to achieve genuine acknowledgment - signalled by "That's right" - rather than superficial agreement.

A key technique is mirroring, where negotiators repeat key words to encourage elaboration and deeper discussion. This pairs with using a calm, measured tone (the "late-night DJ voice") to maintain control of conversations. Open-ended "How?" questions force counterparts to engage in problem-solving, while avoiding the push for premature agreement.

The traditional focus on getting to "yes" is often counterproductive. Instead, embracing "no" creates safety and autonomy for counterparts, allowing them to feel in control and ultimately more willing to reach genuine agreement. This approach recognises that forced compliance rarely leads to lasting commitments.

Time pressure and deadlines are usually artificial constructs that can be managed strategically. Skilled negotiators learn to challenge claims of "fairness" directly. Using precise numbers in offers ($37,263) can project credibility. Proposals are most effective when framed around what the other party stands to lose rather than gain.

Building genuine commitment requires testing every "yes" multiple times and adapting to different negotiator personalities - whether they're Accommodators focused on relationships, Analysts who need data, or Assertives seeking quick results. This flexibility allows negotiators to match their approach to their counterpart's style.

The Ackerman system provides a structured approach to bargaining, using incremental moves (65-85-95-100%) to reach target prices. However, this technical framework must be coupled with emotional intelligence and psychological insight to be truly effective.

Critical to success is the ability to identify "Black Swans" - hidden information that can transform negotiations. These unexpected factors often emerge through careful observation and rapport-building rather than direct questioning.

Body language, tone, and indirect communications often reveal more than explicit statements. Face-to-face interaction remains valuable for picking up subtle cues that might indicate underlying motivations or constraints not apparent in formal exchanges.

Ultimately, successful negotiation is about understanding human psychology rather than mastering aggressive tactics or theoretical frameworks. By focusing on emotional intelligence, careful listening, and strategic questioning, negotiators can achieve better outcomes while maintaining relationships and trust.

Deep Summary

Longer form notes, typically condensed, reworded and de-duplicated.

Chapter 1: How to become the smartest person in any room

FBI hostage negotiators do better than Harvard Law professors in a mock negotiations. People struggle against a negotiator’s calm, open-ended questioning. Pure rationality often crumbles under emotional pressure and that strategic empathy can outmanoeuvre complex theories. Hostage negotiation evolved beyond brute force tactics, spurred by tragic incidents that exposed the need to engage emotionally disturbed captors rather than applying purely logical processes. Law enforcement came to realise that real-life crises are fuelled by irrationality and emotion. The FBI adopted empathy-centric techniques and they have proven to be more effective.

The Harvard approach was rooted in rational problem solving and concepts like BATNA and ZOPA, struggled when confronted with unpredictable human factors. Meanwhile, research by Kahneman and Tversky showed that cognitive biases dominate decisions, underscoring the power of emotional dynamics. The FBI recognised that resolving conflicts depended less on memorizing scripts and more on practicing active listening and calibrated questions. These methods, referred to as “Tactical Empathy,” validate the other side’s emotions and build trust, laying a foundation where problem solving becomes possible.

Negotiation pervades daily life. Whether confronting criminals, negotiating salaries, or settling domestic disagreements, the same principles apply. Empathy-driven negotiation leverages psychology and emotional intelligence to gather insights and influence behaviour. Listening serves not as a passive concession but as a dynamic way to extract information and shape the interaction. Drawing lessons from actual hostage incidents, the FBI’s approach works because it harnesses how people really think and feel, rather than how they’re supposed to think and feel. Hostage negotiation isn't just for crises; it reveals universal truths about how people think and interact.

• The rational, formulaic approach to negotiation often fails because people are driven by emotion and bias.
• Landmark cases like Attica, Munich, and the Downs hijacking paved the way for a more nuanced crisis response.
• The FBI evolved to emphasise empathy, recognising most hostage-takers are in deep emotional crisis.
• Traditional bargaining frameworks like "win-win" broke down with irrational actors who simply couldn't reason that way.
• The concept of "Tactical Empathy" emerged, focusing on listening, rapport, and trust-building.
• Research by Kahneman and Tversky showed that "System 1" emotions steer "System 2" rationality.
• Effective negotiators use emotional intelligence to shape the counterpart's thinking rather than force logic.
• Real breakthroughs occur when individuals feel truly heard and acknowledged.
• Negotiation is everywhere: from business deals to everyday interactions with friends, family, and colleagues.
• Mastery of these skills means using empathy and psychology to influence outcomes while preserving relationships.

Chapter 2: Be a Mirror: How to Quickly Establish Rapport

Two robbers storm into a Brooklyn bank, brutalise the guard and a teller, and hold hostages. The negotiators arrive expecting a quick surrender but find themselves facing layers of misinformation from the lead hostage-taker, who pretends to have multiple partners. He stalls for time by claiming to feed and protect the hostages, all while hiding or destroying money. Negotiators learn to slow things down, focus solely on the hostage-takers’ words, and deploy simple yet potent techniques like mirroring and a calm, late-night FM DJ voice. One accomplice eventually surrenders, giving negotiators valuable intel on how many criminals are inside. Through careful pacing and unrelenting listening, they defuse the crisis, release the hostages safely, and arrest the ringleader.

Mirroring, or repeating key words, draws people out and inspires them to divulge critical details. Speaking calmly and positively keeps aggressors relaxed, while maintaining focus on their needs builds trust. Negotiation is not a battle of arguments but an act of discovery: by staying open, questioning assumptions, and controlling the tone, you can turn even a standoff into a cooperative exchange.

• Assume surprises exist; use negotiation to reveal them
• Treat assumptions as hypotheses; verify them through active dialogue
• Listening is the core skill; eliminate the voice in your own head
• Slowing the pace prevents misunderstandings and builds rapport
• A genuine smile and friendly tone stimulate collaboration
• The late-night FM DJ voice projects calm authority without aggression
• The positive/playful voice is your go-to; it keeps the conversation constructive
• The direct/assertive voice risks pushback; use it sparingly
• Mirroring key words or phrases disarms tension and invites more information
• People fear what's different and trust what's similar; mirroring fosters a sense of sameness
• Negotiate with an open mind; discard outdated assumptions as new facts emerge
• Mastering these simple tactics leads to better outcomes in any confrontation

Chapter 3: Don’t Feel Their Pain, Label It - How to Create Trust with Empathy

Acknowledging and labelling emotions can defuse tension and build trust in any negotiation. Rather than avoiding or denying the other side’s fears, successful negotiators go straight at them, using a gentle tone of voice and well-placed statements that show an understanding of the counterpart’s perspective. This process of “tactical empathy” is not about sympathizing or agreeing, but about validating emotions so that the other side feels heard. Labelling negative feelings helps interrupt a counterpart’s fear response, clearing the way for constructive dialogue. Labelling positive feelings can reinforce collaboration. By taking ownership of potential accusations in advance—an “accusation audit”—negotiators can prevent those issues from festering.

Through simple but powerful techniques like mirroring key words, listening attentively, and staying silent after labelling, negotiators allow their counterparts to feel safe enough to share vital information. Going slowly, pacing the conversation, and focusing on empathy before making direct requests builds rapport and makes it likelier the other side will respond positively. The strategies apply as much to everyday interactions as to high-stakes standoffs; fear and trust operate the same way in all human brains.

• Labelling emotions—negative or positive—defuses them by making them explicit
• Tactical empathy is about understanding, not necessarily agreeing
• Saying "It seems like..." or "It looks like..." reduces the other side's defensiveness
• Silence is key: let labels and mirrors sink in; the other person will fill the gap
• Start by addressing reasons they won't make a deal—clear the path before presenting solutions
• Conduct an accusation audit: list the worst charges they might make against you and bring them up first
• Use a calm, slow, soothing voice to de-escalate tension
• Mirroring (repeating the last few words they've said) encourages them to elaborate
• People want their situation acknowledged; that alone can shift their stance from hostile to cooperative
• Focus on interrupting the fear response in the other person's brain so trust can develop
• Even reluctant negotiators respond when their worries are voiced for them
• Labelling and acknowledging emotions applies across all situations, from hostage stand-offs to everyday disagreements

Chapter 4: Beware “Yes” Master “No” - How to Generate Momentum and Make it Safe to Reveal the Real Stakes

Many of us push for “Yes” too quickly, overlooking that “No” can be more productive. “Yes” often feels like surrender, while “No” grants a crucial sense of safety and control, allowing both parties to identify what they really need. A forced “Yes” can hide deeper objections and lead to phony agreements. Embracing “No” shifts the conversation forward and reveals what truly stands in the way. Granting permission to say “No,” or even encouraging it, diffuses tension and invites authentic dialogue. By asking carefully framed questions and highlighting people’s need to feel in control, negotiators can draw out honest responses, spark cooperation, and guide others toward genuine commitment.

Skilful negotiators understand that “No” is not rejection but rather the start of clear communication. They look for “No” by gently challenging the other side’s assumptions or offering them an easy way to disagree. Short, direct questions that invite “No” can restart stalled interactions and eliminate the other side’s desire to dodge or delay. Building trust relies on acknowledging objections instead of drowning them in forced positivity. It’s not about being “nice,” but about being genuine: letting the counterpart define what they don’t want creates the autonomy they need to agree on what they do.

• "Yes" can be empty unless it leads to genuine commitment
• "No" creates safety, clarifies objectives, and often jumpstarts real negotiation
• Asking "Is now a bad time?" puts control in the other person's hands and lowers their defences
• Granting permission to say "No" reduces pushback and establishes rapport
• A "No"-oriented question like "Have you given up on this project?" re-engages unresponsive counterparts
• Three types of "Yes" exist: counterfeit, confirmation, and commitment; only commitment "Yes" truly matters
• Forcing a "No"—for example, by mislabelling emotions—can draw the other party into correcting you and clarifying their stance
• People crave autonomy; letting them say "No" satisfies that urge and opens their mind
• Persuasion succeeds when the counterpart believes the final idea is theirs, not the negotiator's
• Beware of chasing "Yes" too soon; you risk false agreement and stifled dialogue
• Letting the other side articulate what they don't want reveals the path to what they do
• Genuine understanding matters more than surface-level politeness

Chapter 5: Trigger the Two Words that Immediately Transform Any Negotiation - How to gain the permission to persuade

Ego, emotion, and hidden motives can derail standard bargaining tactics. Despite logical efforts to reduce a sky-high ransom demand, people can cling to their demands. Breakthroughs are possible when negotiators shift to listening, labelling, and summarising grievances to evoke the pivotal phrase, “That’s right.” Aiming for “That’s right” (rather than “You’re right” or a premature “Yes”) fosters genuine engagement and paves the way for real change.

Skilled negotiators focus on building understanding and trust through empathy, pausing, mirroring, and summarising. They let the other side lay out their perspective until it is plainly reflected back. When the counterpart delivers a heartfelt “That’s right,” they confirm ownership of the situation, reducing resistance to possible next steps. In contrast, “You’re right” often masks false agreement because it merely aims to end the discussion. The same principle holds in sales calls or internal negotiations. Once a negotiator uncovers the counterpart’s deeper motivations, acknowledging them out loud transforms the tone and fosters cooperation. Even minor personal transitions—like persuading a teenager to alter ingrained habits—can hinge on making the other person feel fully understood.

Once the conversation reaches “That’s right,” real collaboration begins. Summaries, combined with labelling emotions, validate the other side’s view in a way that intellectual argument alone cannot. People often need to be heard before they can move away from extreme demands or entrenched positions. “That’s right” signals a shift from defensiveness to alignment. Whether freeing a hostage or resolving a corporate dispute, negotiators must listen carefully, reflect carefully, and then guide the other party toward an epiphany that it is safe to move forward together.

• Summarising and labelling the other side's position, including their emotions, leads to real breakthroughs
• "You're right" often ends conversation without genuine buy-in or behaviour change.
• The Behavioural Change Stairway Model moves from active listening to empathy, rapport, influence, and finally change
• Unconditional positive regard can open dialogue, even with hostile counterparts
• Show the other person's viewpoint is understood by mirroring and paraphrasing, then let silence do its work
• "That's right" emerges when people hear their story accurately reflected back
• Once trust is established, the other side becomes receptive to proposals or new ideas
• Even strong-willed parties pivot after feeling heard and validated
• Aim to transform "war damages" or any other rigid demand into a topic for discussion
• Integrate emotion, not just facts, for maximum impact
• A shift from confrontation to collaboration can result from that moment of mutual recognition

Chapter 6: Bend their Reality -How to Shape What is Fair

Kidnapping waves in Haiti exposed that even in life-and-death situations, ransom demands are rarely about what they seem at first. Criminals often fixate on short-term desires, like “party money,” which creates hidden leverage for the negotiator who can identify and exploit these unspoken objectives.

Understanding that time and “fairness” are powerful manipulators of perception allows a negotiator to bend the other side’s reality, discouraging them from making excessive demands or false compromises. Emotional anchoring—through low offers, unexpected concessions, or simply reframing priorities—shifts the conversation from rigid “How much?” talk to more strategic exchanges where trust and creative solutions arise. Rather than splitting differences or pushing prematurely toward “Yes,” success hinges on revealing underlying needs and positioning your offer as the path to avoid a bigger loss.

Deadlines can distort decision-making, but they are often arbitrary. If you resist creating arbitrary time pressure, you can use the other side’s own ticking clock against them. The word “fair” is another common tactic: either weaponised to disarm you or legitimately promised to show good faith. A negotiator should also consider employing odd numbers for offers and weaving in non-monetary perks to reduce contention over price. Placing the other side’s sense of gain or loss in sharp relief greatly influences whether they’ll embrace your proposal. Even in simpler transactions like job negotiations, anchoring high, defining success metrics, and appealing to your counterpart’s personal stake in your progress can yield surprisingly beneficial deals.

• Compromise is frequently a bad deal and often benefits no one
• Knowing your opponent's real motivations gives you huge leverage
• Deadlines mostly loom in our heads; resist panic and use time pressure to your advantage
• The word 'fair' is usually exploited to elicit concessions; ask how you're being unfair instead of caving in
• Emotionally anchor the other side by describing dire scenarios before making your real offer
• Extreme initial anchors make subsequent, more reasonable offers look appealing
• Subtly reframe or question 'unfairness' rather than conceding to it
• People prefer risking more to avoid losses than to achieve gains; underscore what they stand to lose
• When in doubt, let them throw out a number first. You may get a positive suprise
• Using odd or precise figures (e.g., £37,263) projects credibility and finality
• Presenting non-monetary items can spark reciprocity and defuse strict price standoffs
• Great negotiators plan for 'no deal is better than a bad deal'
• Focus on hidden drivers, not face value; reframe the deal so that your offer spares them bigger losses
• Enhancing collaboration around 'How do we both benefit?' yields better outcomes than haggling over pounds

Chapter 7: Create the Illusion of Control - How to Calibrate Questions to Transform Conflict into Collaboration

Negotiators often sabotage deals by trying to dominate and insist on being right. A more effective approach involves letting the other side feel in control. Calibrated, open-ended questions such as “How am I supposed to do that?” encourage counterparts to solve your problems. They disarm defensiveness, elicit more information, and nudge the other side toward your desired outcome—all while preserving their sense of autonomy. This technique proved invaluable for the FBI, especially when prodding kidnappers to provide proof of life or release hostages. Even in business, these questions prompt cooperation and expose hidden agendas, revealing that real leverage comes from listening and managing emotions rather than pushing for victory.

Illusions of control succeed because they sidestep confrontational standoffs. Instead of yes-no queries, “what” and “how” open a dialogue. Skilful negotiators use empathy, acknowledgment, and a measured tone to temper escalations. Slowing your reactions, suspending judgment, and steering others with open-ended questions keep talks constructive, even when tensions run high. Crucially, controlling one’s own emotions is essential; unregulated anger destroys dialogue. The best negotiators gather information by letting the other side speak, gently guiding them toward solutions that work for both parties.

• Asking "How am I supposed to do that?" moves the other person to find a solution for your dilemma
• Calibrated questions remove confrontation; they replace demands with requests for help
• "What" and "how" queries generate expansive answers and defuse resistance; avoid "why" unless it supports your goal
• Real listening uses patience, silence, and strategic questions to uncover hidden motives
• The negotiator who talks less usually has more control, because they glean crucial information
• Leaving your counterpart's pride intact encourages them to cooperate and feel they're shaping the outcome
• People respond better to open-ended dialogue than to direct confrontation
• Creating the illusion of control diminishes others' fear or hostility and invites problem-solving
• Exercise self-control: emotional outbursts or forceful statements sabotage constructive exchanges
• Teams on the other side may have conflicting agendas; influencing each player is vital
• A "no"-oriented question like "Have you given up on...?" can restart contact with reluctant parties
• Give your counterpart room to step in with their ideas, so they adopt your solution as their own

Chapter 8: Guarantee Execution - How to Spot the Liars and Ensure Follow-Through from Everyone Else

Negotiating is only half the battle; ensuring that agreements are actually carried out is where real success lies. Saying “yes” in the moment may hide deeper obstacles among the unseen individuals “behind the table.” Calibrated questions—especially the open-ended “How…?”—pressure the other side to think through implementation and guide them gently toward your solution. By patiently deferring and resisting the push to offer your own ideas, you subtly take control of the process. A calm tone and clear “How” questions force your counterpart to reconcile their demands with real-world constraints. Paying attention to body language, tone, and word choice reveals honesty and helps you spot true buy-in versus empty promises. And always remember: a final “yes” is nothing without a detailed path to “how.”

• "Yes" without "How" is hollow; insist on details of execution before finalising a deal
• Encourage the other side to suggest the solution themselves through calibrated "How" questions
• Ask "How am I supposed to do that?" as a non-confrontational way to say "No," prodding them to revise demands
• Every "yes" should be tested at least three times (the Rule of Three) to confirm it's genuine and not just appeasement
• Probe the motives of third parties not at the table; deal-killers often lurk offstage
• If words conflict with tone or body language, use labels to surface hidden reservations
• Skilled negotiators handle aggressive or manipulative types by asking open-ended questions, never confronting them head-on
• Slowing the negotiation buys time for facts to surface and for hotheaded adversaries to cool down
• Use your name to humanise yourself (the "Chris discount"), creating empathy from the other side
• Even a polite "No" can be leveraged in four to five steps before uttering the word itself outright
• Odd or specific numbers feel more serious and thought-out, influencing perceived fairness
• Manage your emotions to avoid destructive showdowns; assertiveness must come wrapped in respect
• True implementation happens when the other side believes it's their plan; let them own the solution

Chapter 9: Bargain Hard - How to Get Your Price

Bargaining is a critical yet often stressful final step. Once trust and rapport have been established, knowing how to haggle effectively can make or break a deal. People generally fall into three negotiating styles: Accommodator, Analyst, or Assertive. Each has its own default behaviours, and skilled negotiators adapt to them rather than forcing everyone into a one-size-fits-all approach. When a counterpart throws out extreme anchors or employs hardball tactics, responding with calm clarity and strategic questions keeps you in control. Using precise numbers, incremental concessions, and well-timed questions helps push negotiations toward your target. A structured approach like the Ackerman model, combined with emotional intelligence, sets the stage for successful haggling without burning bridges.

Negotiation is less about finding the mythical “middle” and more about guiding your counterpart to see value in your terms. Calibrated questions—particularly “How am I supposed to do that?”—deflect demands gracefully and prompt the other side to reconsider. Adapting your tone and style to match (or gently subvert) your counterpart’s perspective can unearth hidden flexibility. Bargaining does not need aggression; respect, empathy, and a willingness to walk away often secure better outcomes than blunt confrontation.

• Bargaining is the final push after rapport and understanding have been established
• People tend to be Accommodator, Analyst, or Assertive; adapt your style to meet their "normal"
• Accommodators value relationships
• Analysts crave data and thoroughness
• Assertives focus on getting results swiftly
• Silence means different things: an Analyst is thinking, an Accommodator may feel tense, and an Assertive thinks it's their turn to speak
• Handling extreme anchors requires a calm, prepared response to avoid rushing to your maximum
• "How" questions, especially "How am I supposed to do that?", politely decline whilst prodding your counterpart to offer new solutions
• Acknowledging their perspective and setting boundaries in a respectful manner wards off needless hostility
• The Ackerman system (65-85-95-100 per cent approach) uses diminishing concessions and precise numbers to maximise outcomes
• Using humour, small personal touches, or precise "odd" numbers can create psychological leverage
• Prepare thoroughly so you won't fold under pressure; "You fall to your highest level of preparation"
• Separate the person from the problem; you're fighting the issue, not the individual
• Leaving empathy intact while maintaining firmness is more persuasive than attacking or yielding
• Aim high but be ready to walk away; desperation compromises your position
• Don't rely solely on theories like ZOPA; real bargaining involves emotional dynamics and strategic manoeuvres
• Clear, courteous insistence leads to better deals than aggressive demands

Chapter 10: Find the Black Swan - How to Create Breakthroughs by Revealing the Unknown Unknowns

Uncovering black swans hidden or unexpected factors - can radically transform a negotiation. These unknown unknowns may be small bits of information that reveal a counterpart’s constraints or deeper motives. Negotiators often rely too heavily on what has happened before (“known knowns”) and become blind to the unpredictable. By staying flexible, digging into the other side’s worldview, and listening carefully for subtle signals, you can find unexpected leverage that reshapes the entire discussion.

Known forms of leverage include:

• positive (giving them what they want)
• negative (threatening what they fear losing)
• normative (using their own values to influence them)

The key is to move beyond straightforward monetary bargaining and pay attention to emotions, hidden agendas, and genuine human interests that might unlock an unexpected outcome.

Uncovering these Black Swans hinges on patience, empathy, and persistent digging. Listening is not just about hearing surface demands. It also involves reading nonverbal cues, noticing odd remarks, or connecting the dots on constraints or hidden motives. Face-to-face contact is especially revealing. Small talk before or after a formal session, or short side moments in conversation, can expose crucial facts. Once you spot a surprising detail, the entire dynamic may shift in your favour.

By embracing conflict in a constructive manner rather than avoiding it, negotiators can engage deeper motives that might produce inventive deals. Success often demands unearthing these hidden facts that neither side recognized as significant. Leveraging this knowledge—especially by connecting to your counterpart’s deeper values—can provide extraordinary results.

• Over-reliance on prior assumptions blinds you to novel surprises
• Real "game-changers" lie among unknown unknowns (Black Swans) that you must actively uncover
• Thorough listening and persistent questions identify anomalies pointing to hidden agendas or constraints
• If behaviour seems irrational, look for missing information, unspoken limitations, or secret needs
• Face-to-face talks and unguarded social moments reveal more than formal negotiations or email alone
• Leverage comes in three kinds: positive (giving them what they want), negative (taking away something they fear losing), and normative (appealing to their core values)
• Your counterpart's "religion"—their guiding principles—can be key to nudging them toward agreement
• Use open-minded, empathetic strategies; do not assume they're "crazy" when details don't align with your expectations
• Asking "why" they're communicating specific points, and paying attention to contradictions, can expose the true motives
• Calmly explore inconsistencies instead of dismissing them; they could lead to massive breakthroughs
• Observing tone, body language, and fleeting, unscripted comments often unearth crucial insights
• Tying your proposal to your counterpart's aspirations, worldview, or moral framework can dramatically improve outcomes
• Understanding your counterpart fully allows you to address interests they themselves might not articulate
• Embrace conflict as a means to reveal deeper truths rather than shy away from tough discussions
• Find a mutually beneficial solution, shaped by insights gained from hidden or overlooked information